Enforce in bootstrap that check must have stage at least 1 #143048

Kobzol · 2025-06-26T08:01:58Z

This PR is another step towards https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/326414-t-infra.2Fbootstrap/topic/Proposal.20to.20cleanup.20stages.20and.20steps.20after.20the.20redesign/with/523586917, this time dealing with x check.

It enforces the invariant that:

We check std stage N with rustc stage N
We check everything else stage N with rustc stage N - 1

It creates a single function that prepares a proper build compiler for checking something, and also adds snapshot tests for various common check steps. Some obsolete code was also removed.

The default check stage also becomes 1, for all profiles. I tested manually that x check std with download-ci-rustc still works and doesn't build rustc locally.

Closes: #139170

r? @ghost

Kobzol · 2025-06-26T08:04:11Z

CC @jieyouxu (one of many heaps of bootstrap fixup commits I have in store 😆)

bors · 2025-06-26T10:22:00Z

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #141899) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

Kobzol · 2025-06-26T14:31:27Z

Cross-compilation checks are now doing too much work, I need to take a look at how we can reduce that, because x check --stage1 with cross-compilation is no longer a thing.

bors · 2025-07-01T03:25:36Z

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #143254) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

rustbot · 2025-07-01T15:44:03Z

This PR modifies src/bootstrap/defaults.

If appropriate, please update CONFIG_CHANGE_HISTORY in src/bootstrap/src/utils/change_tracker.rs.

This PR modifies src/bootstrap/src/core/config.

If appropriate, please update CONFIG_CHANGE_HISTORY in src/bootstrap/src/utils/change_tracker.rs.

Kobzol · 2025-07-01T15:44:13Z

r? @jieyouxu

rustbot · 2025-07-01T15:44:16Z

jieyouxu is not on the review rotation at the moment.
They may take a while to respond.

bors · 2025-07-01T22:49:32Z

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #143287) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

jieyouxu

I like this a lot in general, it does feel much more self-consistent and coherent.

I left some questions/discussions for things that I wanted to double-check, but overall looks good!

src/bootstrap/src/core/build_steps/check.rs

jieyouxu · 2025-07-02T05:44:55Z

src/bootstrap/src/core/builder/mod.rs

+        self.stage.or(self
+            .built_by
+            .map(|compiler| if self.name == "std" { compiler.stage } else { compiler.stage + 1 }))


Discussion: this makes me feel a bit uneasy, but I guess the logic here is: anything that's not the standard library should be considered a non-library artifact, and should be considered a product of the stage n (compiler, standard library) pair (and so gets numbered as the next stage)? I.e. reading back https://hackmd.io/QXj6LqntQTKPgm3uBuE-aA again, the core model is

stage corresponds to what gets built, not what is used to build it

(The following is me trying to make sure I understand this)

Let's call the (compiler, library) pair¹²
$$\mathbf{CLP}_{\mathrm{stage}} := \left\langle \text{compiler}_{\mathrm{stage}}, \text{library}_{\mathrm{stage}} \right\rangle$$
where the separation between stages is delineated by which $\mathrm{compiler}$ gets built. Then, by design, because the standard library is "special" and tightly coupled with the compiler, we fix the immediate standard library built by $\mathrm{compiler}_{\mathrm{stage}}$ to be of the same $\mathrm{stage}$, i.e. $\mathrm{library}_{\mathrm{stage}}$.

With the stage 0 redesign, we now have a nice straightforward "derivation chain" ($\longrightarrow$; artifacts can be used to build new artifacts) property where
$$\left\langle \text{compiler}_{\mathrm{stage}}, \text{library}_{\mathrm{stage}} \right\rangle \longrightarrow \left\langle \text{compiler}_{\mathrm{stage + 1}}, \text{library}_{\mathrm{stage + 1}} \right\rangle$$
actually holds even for $\mathrm{stage} = 0$.

However, for:

bootstrap tools
Tools that are unconditionally built by the stage 0 $\mathbf{CLP}$, i.e. always depends on $\mathbf{CLP}_{0}$. Their stage numbering will be called $\mathrm{BootstrapTool}_{1}$, at least in the short-term.

host rustc tools
Tools that depend on rustc_private and so on $\mathrm{compiler}_{\mathrm{stage}}$. This means that they will be numbered as $\mathrm{HostRustcTool}_{\mathrm{stage} + 1}$.

std tools
Tools that depend on the whole $\mathbf{CLP}_{\mathrm{stage}}$, i.e. both $\mathrm{compiler}_{\mathrm{stage}}$, and $\mathrm{library}_{\mathrm{stage}}$. Similiarly, this means that they will be numbered as $\mathrm{StdTool}_{\mathrm{stage} + 1}$.

They then follow the general "what gets built" model (?).

Footnotes

I can't come up with a better name, it's not exactly a toolchain, neither is it a "complete" sysroot I think ↩

Not to be confused with the Chilean Peso. ↩

src/bootstrap/src/core/builder/tests.rs

src/bootstrap/src/core/build_steps/check.rs

jieyouxu · 2025-07-02T08:00:08Z

src/bootstrap/src/core/build_steps/check.rs

            builder.std(build_compiler, host);
-            builder.std(build_compiler, target);
+            builder.ensure(Std::new(build_compiler, target));


Question: wait, why is this different? For $\mathrm{stage} \ge 1$, isn't this equivalent? I.e.

rust/src/bootstrap/src/core/builder/mod.rs

Lines 1393 to 1409 in f51c987

if compiler.stage == 0 {

if target != compiler.host {

panic!(

r"It is not possible to build the standard library for `{target}` using the stage0 compiler.

You have to build a stage1 compiler for `{}` first, and then use it to build a standard library for `{target}`.

",

compiler.host

)

}

// We still need to link the prebuilt standard library into the ephemeral stage0 sysroot

self.ensure(StdLink::from_std(Std::new(compiler, target), compiler));

} else {

// This step both compiles the std and links it into the compiler's sysroot.

// Yes, it's quite magical and side-effecty.. would be nice to refactor later.

self.ensure(Std::new(compiler, target));

}

At this point, wouldn't we have already rejected invoking ./x check flow with $\mathrm{stage} = 0$?

Equivalent to what? :) I changed it just to this:

let build_compiler = builder.compiler(builder.top_stage, host); builder.ensure(Std::new(build_compiler, target)); build_compiler

because I remembered that stdlib's proc macros and build scripts are always compiled using the stage0 libstd. We only need the host stdlib when compiling host code of other modes (yeah, I know..).

Except! We actually need the host stdlib when checking the tool itself (not stdlib). Aaaaargh.

Equivalent to what?

NGL, I don't know what I meant by this myself -- when I click at this comment, it's outdated against something, and I can't tell what it was...

src/bootstrap/src/core/builder/tests.rs

jieyouxu · 2025-07-02T08:05:01Z

src/ci/docker/host-x86_64/mingw-check-1/Dockerfile

@@ -48,7 +48,7 @@ ENV SCRIPT \
           python3 ../x.py build src/tools/build-manifest && \
           python3 ../x.py test --stage 0 src/tools/compiletest && \
           python3 ../x.py check compiletest --set build.compiletest-use-stage0-libtest=true && \
-           python3 ../x.py check --stage 1 --target=i686-pc-windows-gnu --host=i686-pc-windows-gnu && \
+           python3 ../x.py check --stage 2 --target=i686-pc-windows-gnu --host=i686-pc-windows-gnu && \


Suggestion: actually, can you add a comment for this specifically that we're exercising cross-compile here, so --stage 1 isn't sufficient?

…eyouxu Add bootstrap check snapshot tests Split off from rust-lang#143048, so that we get a baseline of how check behaved before we make changes to it. Note that the output of the check snapshot tests is suboptimal in many places, as we're missing information about stages and the build compiler. That will be changed in rust-lang#143048. r? `@jieyouxu`

Rollup merge of #143316 - Kobzol:bootstrap-check-tests, r=jieyouxu Add bootstrap check snapshot tests Split off from #143048, so that we get a baseline of how check behaved before we make changes to it. Note that the output of the check snapshot tests is suboptimal in many places, as we're missing information about stages and the build compiler. That will be changed in #143048. r? `@jieyouxu`

Kobzol · 2025-07-06T15:25:53Z

My rebases lost author information of Zalathar from the code I reused from #139170, reinstated that. Rebased and updated the change tracker.

jieyouxu · 2025-07-06T15:41:22Z

Cool, feel free to r=me after PR CI is green.

Kobzol · 2025-07-06T19:19:10Z

@bors r=jieyouxu rollup=never

bors · 2025-07-06T19:19:13Z

📌 Commit 5dc77ba has been approved by jieyouxu

It is now in the queue for this repository.

bors · 2025-07-07T05:04:42Z

⌛ Testing commit 5dc77ba with merge c720f49...

bors · 2025-07-07T08:13:21Z

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: jieyouxu
Pushing c720f49 to master...

github-actions · 2025-07-07T08:16:47Z

What is this?

This is an experimental post-merge analysis report that shows differences in test outcomes between the merged PR and its parent PR.

Comparing 0d11be5 (parent) -> c720f49 (this PR)

Test differences

Show 2 test diffs

2 doctest diffs were found. These are ignored, as they are noisy.

Test dashboard

Run

cargo run --manifest-path src/ci/citool/Cargo.toml -- \
    test-dashboard c720f49c46ec3e70bbc2bbb3e0dd1fe7fc0a47f2 --output-dir test-dashboard

And then open test-dashboard/index.html in your browser to see an overview of all executed tests.

Job duration changes

x86_64-apple-2: 5793.7s -> 4023.2s (-30.6%)
pr-check-2: 2000.5s -> 2519.6s (25.9%)
x86_64-apple-1: 7001.1s -> 5443.5s (-22.2%)
dist-apple-various: 6512.0s -> 7780.2s (19.5%)
dist-s390x-linux: 5462.3s -> 4419.7s (-19.1%)
x86_64-rust-for-linux: 2951.2s -> 2463.0s (-16.5%)
dist-aarch64-apple: 5438.4s -> 4743.0s (-12.8%)
i686-gnu-2: 6299.0s -> 5497.5s (-12.7%)
i686-gnu-1: 8243.7s -> 7263.5s (-11.9%)
x86_64-gnu-tools: 3694.2s -> 3273.4s (-11.4%)

How to interpret the job duration changes?

Job durations can vary a lot, based on the actual runner instance
that executed the job, system noise, invalidated caches, etc. The table above is provided
mostly for t-infra members, for simpler debugging of potential CI slow-downs.

rust-timer · 2025-07-07T11:45:55Z

Finished benchmarking commit (c720f49): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and improvements - no action needed

@rustbot label: -perf-regression

Instruction count

Our most reliable metric. Used to determine the overall result above. However, even this metric can be noisy.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	0.0%	[0.0%, 0.0%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-1.4%	[-1.4%, -1.4%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.8%	[-1.4%, -0.3%]	2
All ❌✅ (primary)	-1.4%	[-1.4%, -1.4%]	1

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (secondary 2.0%)

A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	2.0%	[1.7%, 2.4%]	2
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Cycles

Results (secondary 2.4%)

A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	2.4%	[2.4%, 2.4%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Binary size

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Bootstrap: 462.394s -> 464.259s (0.40%)
Artifact size: 372.15 MiB -> 372.10 MiB (-0.02%)

matthiaskrgr · 2025-07-07T18:11:49Z

How can I do just a check build now?

I had

# The default stage to use for the `check` subcommand
check-stage = 0

# The default stage to use for the `doc` subcommand
doc-stage = 0

# The default stage to use for the `build` subcommand
build-stage = 1

# The default stage to use for the `test` subcommand
test-stage = 1

# The default stage to use for the `dist` subcommand
dist-stage = 2

# The default stage to use for the `install` subcommand
install-stage = 2

# The default stage to use for the `bench` subcommand
bench-stage = 2

which no longer works now:

Building bootstrap
    Finished `dev` profile [unoptimized] target(s) in 0.05s
WARNING: cannot check anything on stage 0. Use at least stage 1.
Build completed unsuccessfully in 0:00:00

so I set

# The default stage to use for the `check` subcommand
check-stage = 1

# The default stage to use for the `doc` subcommand
doc-stage = 1
...

which now does a check build but also a full stage0 -> stage1 bootstrap right after?? 🤔

./x.py check
Building bootstrap
    Finished `dev` profile [unoptimized] target(s) in 0.04s
Checking stage1 compiler artifacts {rustc-main, rustc_abi, rustc_arena, rustc_ast, rustc_ast_ir, rustc_ast_lowering, rustc_ast_passes, rustc_ast_pretty, rustc_attr_data_structures, rustc_attr_parsing, rustc_baked_icu_data, rustc_borrowck, rustc_builtin_macros, rustc_codegen_llvm, rustc_codegen_ssa, rustc_const_eval, rustc_data_structures, rustc_driver, rustc_driver_impl, rustc_error_codes, rustc_error_messages, rustc_errors, rustc_expand, rustc_feature, rustc_fluent_macro, rustc_fs_util, rustc_graphviz, rustc_hashes, rustc_hir, rustc_hir_analysis, rustc_hir_pretty, rustc_hir_typeck, rustc_incremental, rustc_index, rustc_index_macros, rustc_infer, rustc_interface, rustc_lexer, rustc_lint, rustc_lint_defs, rustc_llvm, rustc_log, rustc_macros, rustc_metadata, rustc_middle, rustc_mir_build, rustc_mir_dataflow, rustc_mir_transform, rustc_monomorphize, rustc_next_trait_solver, rustc_parse, rustc_parse_format, rustc_passes, rustc_pattern_analysis, rustc_privacy, rustc_proc_macro, rustc_query_impl, rustc_query_system, rustc_resolve, rustc_sanitizers, rustc_serialize, rustc_session, rustc_smir, rustc_span, rustc_symbol_mangling, rustc_target, rustc_thread_pool, rustc_trait_selection, rustc_traits, rustc_transmute, rustc_ty_utils, rustc_type_ir, rustc_type_ir_macros, stable_mir} (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu)
    Finished `release` profile [optimized + debuginfo] target(s) in 0.29s
Checking tool rustdoc (stage0 -> stage1, x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu)
    Finished `release` profile [optimized + debuginfo] target(s) in 0.15s
Checking stage1 rustc_codegen_cranelift (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu)
    Finished `release` profile [optimized + debuginfo] target(s) in 0.05s
Checking stage1 rustc_codegen_gcc (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu)
    Finished `release` profile [optimized + debuginfo] target(s) in 0.03s
Checking tool clippy (stage0 -> stage1, x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu)
    Finished `release` profile [optimized + debuginfo] target(s) in 0.20s
Checking tool miri (stage0 -> stage1, x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu)
    Finished `release` profile [optimized + debuginfo] target(s) in 0.18s
Checking tool cargo-miri (stage0 -> stage1, x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu)
    Finished `release` profile [optimized + debuginfo] target(s) in 0.14s
Checking stage1 tool miropt-test-tools (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu)
    Finished `release` profile [optimized + debuginfo] target(s) in 0.11s
Checking tool rustfmt (stage0 -> stage1, x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu)
    Finished `release` profile [optimized + debuginfo] target(s) in 0.17s
Checking stage1 rust-analyzer artifacts (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu)
    Finished `release` profile [optimized + debuginfo] target(s) in 0.30s
/home/matthias/vcs/github/rust/build/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/ci-llvm/bin/llvm-strip does not exist; skipping copy
Building compiler artifacts (stage0 -> stage1, x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu)
   Compiling rustc_llvm v0.0.0 (/home/matthias/vcs/github/rust/compiler/rustc_llvm)
   Compiling rustc_parse v0.0.0 (/home/matthias/vcs/github/rust/compiler/rustc_parse)
   Compiling rustc_middle v0.0.0 (/home/matthias/vcs/github/rust/compiler/rustc_middle)
   Compiling rustc_ast_passes v0.0.0 (/home/matthias/vcs/github/rust/compiler/rustc_ast_passes)
   Compiling rustc_expand v0.0.0 (/home/matthias/vcs/github/rust/compiler/rustc_expand)
   Compiling rustc_builtin_macros v0.0.0 (/home/matthias/vcs/github/rust/compiler/rustc_builtin_macros)
   Compiling rustc_infer v0.0.0 (/home/matthias/vcs/github/rust/compiler/rustc_infer)
   Compiling rustc_transmute v0.0.0 (/home/matthias/vcs/github/rust/compiler/rustc_transmute)
   Compiling rustc_incremental v0.0.0 (/home/matthias/vcs/github/rust/compiler/rustc_incremental)
   Compiling rustc_symbol_mangling v0.0.0 (/home/matthias/vcs/github/rust/compiler/rustc_symbol_mangling)
   Compiling rustc_mir_dataflow v0.0.0 (/home/matthias/vcs/github/rust/compiler/rustc_mir_dataflow)
   Compiling rustc_pattern_analysis v0.0.0 (/home/matthias/vcs/github/rust/compiler/rustc_pattern_analysis)
   Compiling rustc_ast_lowering v0.0.0 (/home/matthias/vcs/github/rust/compiler/rustc_ast_lowering)
   Compiling rustc_query_impl v0.0.0 (/home/matthias/vcs/github/rust/compiler/rustc_query_impl)
   Compiling rustc_smir v0.0.0 (/home/matthias/vcs/github/rust/compiler/rustc_smir)
   Compiling stable_mir v0.1.0-preview (/home/matthias/vcs/github/rust/compiler/stable_mir)
   Compiling rustc_monomorphize v0.0.0 (/home/matthias/vcs/github/rust/compiler/rustc_monomorphize)
   Compiling rustc_metadata v0.0.0 (/home/matthias/vcs/github/rust/compiler/rustc_metadata)
   Compiling rustc_trait_selection v0.0.0 (/home/matthias/vcs/github/rust/compiler/rustc_trait_selection)

edit: I also have
download-rustc = false

Kobzol · 2025-07-07T18:41:25Z

x check checks both rustc and std, amongst other things. For checking std, you need to build a stage 1 rustc after the stage0 redesign, there's no way around that (other than download-ci-rustc).

rustbot added A-testsuite Area: The testsuite used to check the correctness of rustc T-bootstrap Relevant to the bootstrap subteam: Rust's build system (x.py and src/bootstrap) T-infra Relevant to the infrastructure team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. labels Jun 26, 2025

Kobzol force-pushed the bootstrap-check-stage-1 branch from f06e41e to aed5f23 Compare June 26, 2025 08:03

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

bors added the S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. label Jun 26, 2025

Kobzol force-pushed the bootstrap-check-stage-1 branch from aed5f23 to a36ee24 Compare June 26, 2025 14:29

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

Kobzol mentioned this pull request Jul 1, 2025

Cannot check rustc from master branch on Windows 10: build failure in rustc_codegen_gcc #142754

Open

Kobzol force-pushed the bootstrap-check-stage-1 branch from a36ee24 to 22fb548 Compare July 1, 2025 15:43

Kobzol marked this pull request as ready for review July 1, 2025 15:44

rustbot added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Jul 1, 2025

rustbot assigned jieyouxu Jul 1, 2025

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

jieyouxu removed the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Jul 2, 2025

Kobzol mentioned this pull request Jul 2, 2025

Add bootstrap check snapshot tests #143316

Merged

jieyouxu reviewed Jul 2, 2025

View reviewed changes

Kobzol force-pushed the bootstrap-check-stage-1 branch from 22fb548 to fae5ba2 Compare July 3, 2025 15:59

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

Kobzol force-pushed the bootstrap-check-stage-1 branch from fae5ba2 to 996cd08 Compare July 5, 2025 08:02

Kobzol added 11 commits July 6, 2025 17:25

Unify selection of build compiler for checking in a single function

c054c11

Add change tracker entry

38b09dd

Add staging comment to check::Rustc

4017638

Update Mode::ToolStd comment

8d4d050

Update library cross-compilation test

33e6b7a

Add #[tracing::instrument] to the LLVM build step

97da04c

Use stage auto-bump when cross-checking on stage 1

2071976

Add support for allowing features when checking tools

775c970

Horrible hack to make codegen backends "work" during check

18768f0

Fix CI

baa55ae

Do not ever cross-check bootstrap tools

5dc77ba

Kobzol force-pushed the bootstrap-check-stage-1 branch from 6fbfbd1 to 5dc77ba Compare July 6, 2025 15:25

bors added S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. and removed S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. labels Jul 6, 2025

bors added the merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. label Jul 7, 2025

bors merged commit c720f49 into rust-lang:master Jul 7, 2025
12 checks passed

rustbot added this to the 1.90.0 milestone Jul 7, 2025

bors mentioned this pull request Jul 7, 2025

[do not merge] CI experiments #112049

Draft

Kobzol mentioned this pull request Jul 7, 2025

Use the bootstrap compiler for x check on bootstrap tools #139170

Closed

Kobzol deleted the bootstrap-check-stage-1 branch July 7, 2025 08:19

	if compiler.stage == 0 {
	if target != compiler.host {
	panic!(
	r"It is not possible to build the standard library for `{target}` using the stage0 compiler.
	You have to build a stage1 compiler for `{}` first, and then use it to build a standard library for `{target}`.
	",
	compiler.host
	)
	}

	// We still need to link the prebuilt standard library into the ephemeral stage0 sysroot
	self.ensure(StdLink::from_std(Std::new(compiler, target), compiler));
	} else {
	// This step both compiles the std and links it into the compiler's sysroot.
	// Yes, it's quite magical and side-effecty.. would be nice to refactor later.
	self.ensure(Std::new(compiler, target));
	}

Enforce in bootstrap that check must have stage at least 1 #143048

Enforce in bootstrap that check must have stage at least 1 #143048

Uh oh!

Conversation

Kobzol commented Jun 26, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Kobzol commented Jun 26, 2025

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

bors commented Jun 26, 2025

Uh oh!

Kobzol commented Jun 26, 2025

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

bors commented Jul 1, 2025

Uh oh!

rustbot commented Jul 1, 2025

Uh oh!

Kobzol commented Jul 1, 2025

Uh oh!

rustbot commented Jul 1, 2025

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

bors commented Jul 1, 2025

Uh oh!

jieyouxu left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

jieyouxu Jul 2, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Footnotes

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

jieyouxu Jul 2, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Kobzol Jul 3, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Kobzol Jul 3, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

jieyouxu Jul 4, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

jieyouxu Jul 2, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

Kobzol commented Jul 6, 2025

Uh oh!

jieyouxu commented Jul 6, 2025

Uh oh!

Kobzol commented Jul 6, 2025

Uh oh!

bors commented Jul 6, 2025

Uh oh!

bors commented Jul 7, 2025

Uh oh!

bors commented Jul 7, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Jul 7, 2025

Test differences

Job duration changes

Uh oh!

rust-timer commented Jul 7, 2025

Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and improvements - no action needed

Instruction count

Kobzol commented Jun 26, 2025 •

edited

Loading

jieyouxu Jul 2, 2025 •

edited

Loading

jieyouxu Jul 2, 2025 •

edited

Loading

Kobzol Jul 3, 2025 •

edited

Loading

jieyouxu Jul 4, 2025 •

edited

Loading

matthiaskrgr commented Jul 7, 2025 •

edited

Loading